Pop icon Celine Dion on Friday cancelled all her remaining shows scheduled for 2023-2024, saying she was not strong enough to tour as she...

Just six days remain before America could run out of money to pay its bills in a calamity that could trigger a recession and global economic turmoil. Deep divisions remain between the White House and House Republicans over a potential deal under which Congress would vote to raise the government's borrowing limit in exchange for capping spending.

A four-count federal indictment against Donald Trump accuses the former president of conspiring with his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and deprive Americans of their right to have their votes counted. The detailed, 45-page federal indictment on 1 August outlines three criminal conspiracies and Mr Trump’s alleged obstruction of the certification of Joe Biden’s victory, a multi-state scheme built on a legacy of lies and conspiracy theories to undermine the democratic process. Mr Trump appeared in court in Washington, DC, on 3 August to plead not guilty to the charges and once more complained that he was the victim of political persecution by his enemies. “When you look at what’s happening this is a persecution of a political opponent,” he told reporters afterwards. “This was never supposed to happen in America. This is the persecution of the person that’s leading by very, very substantial numbers in the Republican primary and leading Biden by a lot so if you can’t beat them you persecute them or prosecute ‘em,” Here are eight key points from the historic indictment of the former commander-in-chief. A five-part scheme to overturn election results The indictment outlines five major elements of an alleged scheme that forms the basis of the charges against Mr Trump, including a conspiracy to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The indictment states that Mr Trump and co-conspirators relied on knowingly false claims about election fraud to pressure state lawmakers and officials to subvert election outcomes by ignoring the popular vote, then dismissing legitimate electors and assigning illegitimate ones loyal to Mr Trump. They then organised those fraudulent slates of electors in states that the Republican lost, according to prosecutors. Mr Trump and his allies then allegedly used the authority of the Justice Department to conduct sham investigations and press state lawmakers into action to approve those false slates of electors. Then-President Trump and his allies then attempted to enlist then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject legitimate results, including an attempt on 6 January 2021 to fraudulently alter the results while overseeing the certification of the election, according to the indictment. And after it was clear that Mr Pence would not do so, Mr Trump “exploited” the chaos from a mob of his supporters, fuelled by his election lies, to continue to delay the certification based on those same false claims, the indictment states. Trump knew his election lies were lies Mr Trump’s “prolific lies” about election fraud span “dozens of specific claims” that he knew were false, according to prosecutors, despite “candid advice” from his own aides, administration officials and the Justice Department and determinations from the courts and election administrators across the country, which the former president then “deliberately disregarded”. His “knowingly false statements” were “integral to his criminal plans to defeat the federal government function, obstruct the certification, and interfere with others’ right to vote and have their votes counted,” according to prosecutors. Many of the examples included in the indictment were previously known, though prosecutors isolated claims and schemes involving five key battleground states that Mr Trump lost. “Despite having lost, [Mr Trump] was determined to remain in power,” according to the indictment. “These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. In fact, the Defendant was notified repeatedly that his claims were untrue – often by the people on whom he relied for candid advice on important matters, and who were best positioned to know the facts – and he deliberately disregarded the truth.” There are six co-conspirators Six unnamed co-conspirators who allegedly ushered through Mr Trump’s actions are listed throughout the indictment. Based on their alleged actions that match previous descriptions and events surrounding the case in the aftermath of the 2020 election, those co-conspirators are likely to include Trump-connected attorneys Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and Sidney Powell – all of whom face professional sanctions in the wake of their efforts. The other co-conspirators are likely to include former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark – who “attempted to use the Justice Department to open sham election crime investigations and influence state legislatures with knowingly false claims of election fraud” – and Kenneth Cheseboro, another attorney who promoted the fraudulent electors scheme. A sixth unnamed co-conspirator is described as a “political consultant who helped implement a plan to submit fraudulent slates of presidential electors to obstruct the certification proceeding”. A pressure campaign and fraudulent electors The attempts among Mr Trump and his allies to pursue a so-called “alternate” fraudulent elector scheme are well reported and central to the House select committee investigation surrounding January 6. The indictment outlines Mr Trump’s use of “deceit” with the aid of his six co-conspirators to pressure officials in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to subvert legitimate election results and change electoral votes. Mr Trump then relied on “dishonesty, fraud and deceit” to organise those fraudulent electors to submit false vote certificates to Congress, according to prosecutors. Mr Trump and his network of co-conspirators and Republican Party officials directed officials to perform “sham” proceedings that would ultimately position Mr Pence to oversee the fraudulent certification of a bogus slate of electors that would allow Mr Trump to cling to power, the indictment states. The former president also allegedly leveraged the Justice Department and the White House to advance those electors, while Mr Trump ignored legal counsel from the US attorney general to convince Mr Pence to overturn the election. Trump’s attempts to convince Pence to overturn the election When Mr Pence called Mr Trump on Christmas Day in 2020, the president quickly turned the conversation to the upcoming joint session of Congress on 6 January 2021, when Mr Pence was set to preside over the ceremonial certification of the electoral college votes, according to the indictment. “You know I don’t think I have the authority to change the outcome,” Mr Pence said, according to prosecutors. On 1 January, Mr Pence resisted Mr Trump’s efforts again, to which Mr Trump allegedly replied: “You’re too honest.” Days later, Mr Trump and a co-conspirator believed to be Mr Eastman pressed Mr Pence to unilaterally reject the legitimate results or send them back to state legislatures, a strategy that Mr Pence questioned was even defensible, prosecutors wrote. “Well, nobody’s tested it before,” Mr Eastman allegedly replied. The indictment states that Mr Pence took “contemporaneous notes” from that meeting. Mr Trump continued to press Mr Pence, in both one-on-one White House meetings and in public statements in remarks leading up to the attack on the Capitol. That morning, an “agent” for Mr Trump contacted an unnamed US senator asking him to “hand deliver” fraudulent elector certificates from Michigan and Wisconsin, according to the indictment. Mr Pence rejected them. Mr Trump later called Mr Pence demanding once against that he either reject or return legitimate results for Mr Biden. Trump officials considered the Insurrection Act Three days before January 6, a co-conspirator believed to be Mr Clark spoke with a deputy White House counsel who had previously warned Mr Trump that “there is no world, there is no option in which you do not leave the White House” on 20 January 2021. That same White House counsel allegedly tried to dissuade Mr Clark from assuming the role of acting US attorney general, stressing that there was no evidence of widespread fraud and that if Mr Trump successfully overrides the election there would be “riots in every major city in the United States”, according to the indictment. “Well,” Mr Clark allegedly replied, “that’s why there’s an Insurrection Act.” Mr Trump had previously threatened to use the Insurrection Act to quash Election Day protests and civil rights groups and legal analysts had feared his months-long campaign to undermine election results could serve as a pretext to deploy militarised federal and civil law enforcement into American streets. Trump ‘exploited’ the Capitol attack to keep delaying the inevitable Following an hours-long siege at the Capitol and Mr Trump’s initial refusal to urge his supporters to leave, the president’s aides and co-conspirators tried to pressure members of Congress to object to the election results. That evening, White House aides tried calling two senators, Mr Giuliani tried calling five senators and a US representative, another co-conspirator tried to reach six senators and Mr Giuliani left a voicemail urging a senator to “slow it down so we can get these legislatures to get more information to you,” according to the indictment. In another message to a senator, he repeated bogus statements about election fraud and told them to “object to every state and kind of spread this out a little bit like a filibuster,” the indictment states. The attack obstructed Congress and delayed the certification for approximately six hours. Mr Pence ultimately announced the certification of Mr Biden’s victory at 3.41am. A charge that stems from the Civil War’s aftermath A crime of conspiracy against rights invokes Section 241 of Title 18 of US Code, a law that dates back to bedrock civil rights protections for newly enfranchised Black Americans in a turbulent Reconstruction era in the aftermath of the Civil War. It was among criminal codes under the Enforcement Acts, also known as the Ku Klux Klan Acts, designed to protect Americans’ civil rights enshrined under then-newly enacted 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments. The acts effectively allow the federal government to protect the rights of people to vote, hold office, serve on juries and receive equal protection under the law. Section 241 criminalises conspiracies to “injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person” from exercising such rights. Read More Live updates: Trump pleads not guilty at arraignment in 2020 election case Trump, January 6 and a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election: The federal investigation, explained Will Donald Trump go to prison? Trump’s election fraud claims were always bogus. Will his history of lies finally catch up to him? Jack Smith held nothing back. Here’s what the Trump indictment really means Why Trump is charged under a civil rights law used to prosecute KKK terror Trump may face up to 20 years in prison. But that doesn’t stop him from doing harm

There will be a reunion at the start of September. The pair who combined for the only Champions League-winning goal – penalty shootouts excluded – in Chelsea’s history will be together again. But not for a Chelsea game. When Kai Havertz, the 2021 scorer, and Mason Mount, his supplier, are due to share a pitch again, it is because Arsenal are hosting Manchester United. The pace of change at Stamford Bridge is so swift that, barely two years after Thomas Tuchel’s team triumphed in Porto, only three of the 14 men to take the field that day - Thiago Silva, Ben Chilwell and Reece James – are set to be at Chelsea next season. Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital can argue that the first of the departures, those of Antonio Rudiger and Andreas Christensen, in effect predated their arrival, but not the rest. Chelsea now seem to exist in a state of permanent revolution. If Mount’s exit ought to provide Chelsea with most grounds for regret – Havertz, in contrast, spent three seasons as an enigma – United’s new No. 7 reflects a third phenomenon at Stamford Bridge. If Barcelona spent the summer of 2022 pulling various levers to permit them to trade, Mount is part of Boehly’s third lever. The first two have the air of loopholes; or, at the least, unique circumstances. Part one was based on amortisation over extraordinarily long contracts, thus allowing them to spread the fees – in their accounts, anyway – over much of the next decade. It is a loophole Uefa are closing but Enzo Fernandez, Mykhailo Mudryk and Nicolas Jackson have deals until 2031, Benoit Badiashile, Malo Gusto, Noni Madueke and Andrey Santos contracts until 2030 and Wesley Fofana, David Datro Fofana and Christopher Nkunku are tied down until 2029. Ridiculously, Chelsea have 17 players whose deals last at least another five seasons. Part two of the masterplan involved selling to Saudi Arabia. Perhaps Boehly, the man who acted as though he was cleverer than everyone else for much of a year of rampant stupidity, deserves credit for recognising and capitalising on a new market when some of Chelsea’s rivals are struggling to dispose of unwanted players. Kalidou Koulibaly, Edouard Mendy and, albeit on a free transfer, N’Golo Kante have gone to a newly wealthy league; Hakim Ziyech and Romelu Lukaku could follow and, if Chelsea have their way, perhaps Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang will, too. But the third phase of the Boehly blueprint has entailed selling off the family silver. Letting Ruben Loftus-Cheek join AC Milan was understandable; Chelsea can lament what might have been if a huge talent had stayed fit but, at 27, he had only made 155 appearances for them. But Mount was different: Chelsea’s player of the year in two of the last three campaigns – a lazy trope he has had two bad campaigns shows ignorance – and a footballer who, along with Fernandez, James and Chilwell, looked among the best suited of their squad to Mauricio Pochettino’s demands, he should have been a Stamford Bridge lifer; maybe a future captain, possibly ending up with 500 or 600 appearances to his name. And yet over the last year Chelsea contrived to hire three managers and 18 players – plus bidding for dozens of others – and give several of their existing squad new deals without managing to extend Mount’s contract. It should have been one of the top priorities for the new regime; it did not feel that way and, while Chelsea can claim they had to sell the midfielder to prevent him from leaving on a free transfer, it has the air of a situation they created themselves. His sale was an indictment of their powerbrokers. They may deem it a triumph of negotiating, though, after forcing United to pay more than they wanted to. At an initial £55m, Mount has brought in one of the five biggest fees Chelsea have ever received. But from an accounting perspective, the key element is that it counts as “pure profit” in the books; sales of the homegrown are especially useful in that respect, particularly for a club who may face issues in their attempts to pass Financial Fair Play. It may point to the departures of Callum Hudson-Odoi and Ethan Ampadu, who arguably need moves, but also to those who do not: perhaps Trevoh Chalobah or Conor Gallagher or Armando Broja. It may be telling that Chelsea tried to send Gallagher to Everton in January. Remove the word “pure” and the profit part is still rare. Chelsea sold Mendy at a loss, two years after he was named the best goalkeeper in the world. They sold Koulibaly for half the amount they paid last summer. The £65m they recouped for Havertz may be more than anticipated, but it was still less than his purchase price. Mateo Kovacic only had a year left on his deal and is 29 but he, too, went for a smaller sum than he arrived for. Lukaku, Ziyech and Christian Pulisic, if they go, will bring in under half of a combined cost of almost £200m. That is certainly not all the fault of Boehly and Clearlake: in several cases, their fortunes were declining before the takeover though the chaos of the last year has often compounded that. Being displaced by dozens of new signings can deplete value still further, while Koulibaly and Aubameyang can now be written off as bad buys. And Boehly and Chelsea are trying to fund their trading – or at least negotiate Financial Fair Play – by flogging anything and anyone they inherited. They have surpassed many an expectation by bringing in around £200m already this summer. There may well be another half a dozen players leaving, perhaps swelling the sum towards £300m. But Chelsea’s outlay already stands at the best part of £700m in little over a year. Whether it leaves them with a stronger squad than in 2021 is a moot point: after all, they have gone from being Champions League winners to out of Europe altogether. But by the end of this transfer window, Boehly’s third lever may have exhausted its use. Chelsea might be running out of players to sell. And at some point, they may have to call upon a fourth prong: a distinctly old-fashioned one called trading well. It may involve seeking value for money when buying, rather than repeatedly paying way over the odds, and selling some of their signings for a profit. It could entail keeping players for several years, rather than having a revolving door. It may sound crazy to Boehly and co but Chelsea might have to try it. Read More Mason Mount says it was clear ‘several months ago’ he was not in Chelsea’s plans Chelsea not willing to listen to offers for Levi Colwill amid continued interest Kalidou Koulibaly exits Chelsea to become latest star name joining Saudi Pro League Dybala or Vlahovic: Which Serie A striker should Chelsea sign? Chelsea target two Serie A players in quest for experienced strikers Mauricio Pochettino explains Chelsea ‘risk’ as club enters new era

“Magic, wonder and joy” is the holiday theme at the White House

AMSTERDAM Several Dutch lawmakers on Tuesday challenged the Netherlands' Trade Minister over whether the U.S. has acted correctly

NIAMEY (Reuters) -The Niger military junta that seized power last week and ousted democratically elected president Mohamed Bazoum said on

Ranking the top three goals of MLS matchday 18.

WASHINGTON The United States and China will approve twice the number of passenger flights currently permitted for air

The trees make an 'X' at almost every In-N-Out location. And yes, it's by design.

Forecasters warn of flash flooding across New England with Vermont facing the highest risk.

Swedish tennis player Mikael Ymer has been banned for 18 months for missing three out-of-competition doping tests in a 12-month period